Cochran v. Aguirre, et al.

Filing 84

ORDER denying, without prejudice, Plaintiff's Seventh Motion for Appointment of Counsel 82 signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 2/6/2017. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BILLY COY COCHRAN, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. E. AGUIRRE, 15 Defendant. 16 19 20 21 Case No.: 1:15-cv-01092-AWI-SAB (PC) ORDER DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, PLAINTIFF’S SEVENTH MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL [ECF No. 82] Plaintiff Billy Coy Cochran is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s seventh motion for appointment of counsel, filed February 3, 2017. As Plaintiff is well aware, he does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this 22 action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require any 23 attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District 24 Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional 25 circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section 26 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 27 28 Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 1 1 “exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success on the 2 merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 3 legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). The test for exceptional circumstances requires the Court to evaluate the Plaintiff’s likelihood 4 5 of success on the merits and the ability of the Plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the 6 complexity of the legal issues involved. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 7 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Plaintiff has not demonstrated new or 8 different circumstances to merit appointment of counsel in this case. Circumstances common to most 9 prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish exceptional 10 circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. The Court finds 11 Plaintiff’s reasons for requesting appointment of counsel indistinguishable from the reasons asserted 12 by most prisoners. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s seventh motion for appointment of counsel is be DENIED 13 without prejudice. 14 15 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 6, 2017 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?